"Red Dragon"  wrote 

> > It was
> > not until they began competing with themselves,
> > community vs. community, that intellectual capacity
> > became selectively advantageous.
> 
> Right.  The logical deduction is that it is the "intense intra-species
> competition"  that is the driving force behind the evolution of Homo.   Is
> there no "intra-species" competition among the family of
Chimps,  apes and
> baboons?   I am sure there has got to be.  So why have they failed to get
> better intelligence?  Is it their population is too small  therefore lacking
> in intensity?

I think you might be glossing over the fact that the A'pith brain was
very different than the chimp brain.  Due to the communal selective
factors that are indicated in my scenario we see a hominid brain that
is being selected for being more human-like.  Therein we see selective
advantages for those that could communicate (network), that have
human-like consciousness, human-like cooperative behaviors, etc.  And
to a lesser degree we might see some brain expansion.  My premise is
that the reason we see A'pith brain capacity staying in a state of
stasis for so long is that they lacked the intraspecies element that
emerges with homo.


> 
> The other thing I notice is that  the fingers of the Apith possess nails
> that are flat. and weak ( as also the Homo)  whereas their  ancestor  had
> claws that are sharp, stiff and hard.  Why had this happened?   Why and how
> are the nails more favourable that claws?  I see nails have little
> usefulness functionally.   Human do need to trim their nails periodically.
> Do you know how does the Chimp keep its nails short and manageable?

I don't know, but this phenomena is consistent with loss of canines
which, IMO, is consistent with a shift to a more cooperative, communal
lifestyle.

Jim
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 3/11/04 12:21:08 PM